Difference between revisions of "Double standard"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(added an example of Wikipedia's double standard) |
(improved first sentence that defines the term) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | A '''double standard''' | + | A '''double standard''' applies a harsher rule against someone else than one applies to himself or to strangers, sometimes without realizing it. Conservapedia opposes double standards. |
Many people undergo dramatic life changes when they wake up to how they were applying a double standard, as in: | Many people undergo dramatic life changes when they wake up to how they were applying a double standard, as in: | ||
Revision as of 23:50, July 5, 2009
A double standard applies a harsher rule against someone else than one applies to himself or to strangers, sometimes without realizing it. Conservapedia opposes double standards.
Many people undergo dramatic life changes when they wake up to how they were applying a double standard, as in:
- ignoring people who are charitable and favoring people who are not
- holding grudges against others who acted no worse than oneself
- favoring self-serving people over selfless ones
The son finally decides to return to his father in the Prodigal Son when he realizes that among the people he left his father for, "no one gave him anything" in contrast to his father's generosity. The son had been applying a double standard against his father, but no longer.
Examples of liberal double standards include:
- Global warming: Supporters of the Kyoto Protocol (an emissions reduction treaty) say that "correlation is not causation" when scientists point out the dozens of natural climate cycles linking changes in sunspots to changes in Earth's air temperature. But their argument for a runaway greenhouse effect is based on a single period from 1850 to present in which carbon dioxide levels and air temperatures have risen together.
- Evolution: Ardent supporters of the Theory of Evolution blindly accept any study that purportedly "proves" their theory, without addressing (or even allowing the criticism of) any flaws in such studies. But when it comes to alternative theories (whether it be Creationism, intelligent design, or something else), the same people immediately reject them without even studying the details.
- Wikipedia is much harsher in describing conservatives and sites perceived to be conservative. Compare, for example, Wikipedia's entries on Conservapedia and Scholarpedia.